



Glass, 
Book. 



/ 






J 



LETTER 



HON. HUGH L.,-^" WHITE, 



^ 

h 



LEGISLATURE OF TENNESSEE, 



E C L I N ! N G TO 3 E Y CERTAIN D F THEIR RESOLUTIONS OF INSTRUCTION, 



K ESI G; XING THE OFFICE 



S E N A T U F T II E U X I T E D STATES. 



W ASIIINGT ON: 

PRIMED AT THE MADISONIAX OFFICE. 
1840. 



N4 



1>S^ 



^^ 



V 



CORRESPONDENCE 



Washington, January 13, 1840. 

Sir : 

We have baen deputed by a large number of your fellow citizens of both Houses of Con- 
gress, who had the happiness to liear in the Senate oi the United States, to-day, your reply to 
sundry resolutions lately adopted by the Legislature of Tennessee relative to your course as 
one of her Senators in Congress, to request that you will be pleased to furnish them with a 
copy of that reply for publication. 

Those in behalf of whom we now address you have been prompted to make this request 
as well by the high adfTiiration so lucid an exposition of your principles could not but excite, 
as from the conviction, that going with the sanction of your deservedly exalted reputation 
before the American people, it must be productive of the most salutary etlects upon the public 
mind. 

Persuading ourselves to believe that you will not rcluse to gratify this desire, in which 
we feel assured of the almost unanimous concurrence of your fellow citizens generally, we 
be?; leave to subscribe ourselves. 

With the most perfect respect. 

Your obedient servants, 

WM. D. MERRICK, of Maryland. 
CHRISTOPHER MORGAN, of New York. 
Ho.v. HcGu L. White, of Tennessee. 



Washington, January 14, 1840. 

Gentlemen : 

I have real wiih great sensibility your kind note of yesterday, asking a copy of my 
answer to the General Assembly of Tennessee, which I read in the Senate of the United 

States. 

I cannot do otherwise than comply with such a request, Irom such a quarter, and clothed 
in terms so highly flattering. 

I have so little confidence in my own ability to say any thing worthy of preservation, that 
I very mucli fear when you peruse my answer you will find it was the novelty of the scene, 
rather than the matter contained in the document, which excited any interest in favor oi its 
a nth or. 

Accept for yourselves and those whom you represent, my most grateful acknowledgments 
for the good opinion so kindly expressed, and believe that 
I am, with the highest respect, 

Your most obedient servant, 

HU: L. WHITE. 
The HoM. WiLUAM D. Merrick, of Maryland, and 
The Hon. CnaisTOPHER Morgan, of New York. 



LETTER. 



IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES. 

Januanj IZih., 1840. 
Mr. WHITE rose and addressed the Senate to the loUowiug effect: 

Mr. President : — I have a duty to perform this morning, before we proceed to any regular 
order of the day. Presuming that the business of presenting petitions is now over, I proceed 
to discharge it v>'ith as little delay as possible. 

When I reached this place on the twenty-ninth of November last, I was furnished by one 
of our otiicers with a letter, which contained several resolutions adopled by the Legislature 
of Tennessee, condemning one of the votes given b}' the Senators from that State, at the last 
.session, and instructing them how to act in future, on many subjects. I believed my duty to 
my State, and to the public, would be best discharged by remaining in my seat, and continuing 
to attend to the business of the Senate, in the manner 1 had been accustomed to do, until some 
of the subjects specifically mentioned in the resolutions should be placed before the bodv for 
discussion. On this day of the last week, the Hon. Chairman of the Committee of Finance 
reported a bill, commonly called the Sub-treasury Bill, and gave notice that on this day he 
would ask lor its consideraiion. This being one of the subjects mentioned in the resolu- 
tions, the lime has arrived when, in my opinion, it it respec'.ful to the Legislature of my 
State, that I should present them to this body, to the end that the members of it, as well as 
the communily at large, may be made acquained with what the General Assembly has chosen 
to express as public opinion in Tennessee. I move that the preamble and resolutions, which 
I now send to the Secretary, may be read, printed, and laid on the table. 

After the resolutions had been read, Mr. WmTE proceeded and said, 

Mr. President— As I am now a member of this body, and my instructions have been read 
and ordered to be printed, I consider it proper that I should follow the example set by others, 
and make equallv public the conclusions lo which I have come in relation to them. 

The subjects of which they treat, are of vital interest to the country, and I am anxious that 
the opinions I entertain and e.xpress upon them should neither be misunderstood nor misre- 
presented; I will, therefore, take the liberty of deviating from my usual course of delivering 
my sentiments, (which has been not even to use notes,) and will now read the answer which I 
have prepared, and intend, without dela}', to forward to the same body which adopted the 
resolutions. 

Mr. WmTE then read his answer in the following words; 

To the Honorable the General Assembly 

uf the State of Tennessee. 

Gentlemen — On the 29th of November last, in the city of Washington, I re- 
ceived a copy of sundry preambles and six resolutions, which appear to have been 
adopted by you on the 14th of that month, instructing your Senators, and request- 
ing the repre.sentatives in the Congress of the United States how to act on a variety 
of subjects. 

An answer to the resolutions would have been immediately given had I not 
believed it my duty to remain at the post assigned me by your predecessors, until 
some of the mattersspecitied in them should be presented to the Senate for its 
action. Although I might entertain an opinion dilferent from that employed by 
your honorable body, and might be unwilling to surrender that opinion ; yet if no 
case should be presented for the action of the Senate, in relation to which such 
difference of opinion existed, I could perceive no good reason why I should state 
what course I would pursue, upon a subject, which migiit never be presented for 
consideration. Now, however, bills are presented to the Senate upon some of 
the subjects embraced in your resolutions, and I deem it my duty, without farther 
delay, to inform you, tliat I cannot obey the instructions contained in some of 
those resolutions, and respectfully to assign some of the reasons which influence 
my conduct. 

That I may be the better understood, I will notice each of the resolutions in the 
order in which they were adopted. 



First. As one of jour Senators, I am instructed " to vote against the char- 
tering by Cong-ess of a National Bank." 

This instruction corresponds with the opinion I have repeatedly e.xpressed 
and acted on, and I could now feel no difficulty in conforming my vote to your 
wishes on this subject. 

Secondly. I am instructed " to vote for, and use all fair and proper exertions 
to procure the passa;j;e of the measure brought forward in the Congress of the 
United Slates, commonly called the Sub-Treasury Bill, or Indeoendent Treasury 
Bill," &c. &c. 

The following, with many other, reasons induced me to believe I ought not to 
comply with the instructions contained in this resolution. 

It has often happened, and will generally be the case, that a considerable time 
must elapse between the receipt of public money from the debtor to the United 
States, and its disbursement to their creditors; during this interval the money 
will be much more safe in the custody of well selected Banks than it can be in the 
hands of individuals supposing them to be faithful. 

Suppose any one of your honorable body had one hundred thousand dollars of 
his own money, which he did not intend to use for six or nine months, and lived 
in the vicinity of a Bunk of respectable standing, would he keep the money in his 
own house, under his own care, or would he deposit it in Bank for safe-keeping 
until he wished to use it ? If he was a prudent manj regarding his own interest, 
he certainly would deposit it. 

-Are we then justified in taking less care of ihe people's money than a prudent 
man would take of his own ? With great deference to your better judgment, I 
think not. 

It often happens that the receiving oflicers have on hand much larger sums 
than that named in the supposed case, and as the sum is increased and the time 
it is to be kept between its receipt and disbursement enlarged, the danger of 
loss, when in the hands of an individual, is increased likewise. 

Again. All experience teaches us that large sums of public money left in the 
hands of individuals will be misused and squandered. It will either be u.^^ed by 
the individual himself for his own purposes, or loaned to importunate friends 
whom he may wish to accommodate, and nho are sure not to be able to return 
it when called lor. 

It is said Banks are irresponsible, therefore not to be trusted. In my opinion, 
generally, they are more responsible than individuals. — They have more rreans 
with which to pay, and if they fail to make payments when required, they are 
as much amenable to the process of a court of justice as individuals are ; and ia 
addition, they are to be found with much more certainty, as a corporation aggre- 
gate can very seldom abscond, or leave the country, which an individual easily 
can, and often does do when he misuses the public money. 

We need all the checks which can reasonably be imposed on our collecting and 
disbursing officers. Banks have been found to furnish one highly beneficial 
upon both of these classes. By a regulation between the Treasury Department 
and each deposit Bank, the latter has been required at short periods to furnish 
its account current with the Treasurer, and on the face of it to show all sums de- 
posited to his credit, when such deposits were made, and by whom. By com- 
j)aring this account with the accounts I'urnished by the respective olficei's them- 
selves, it can readily be discovered whether they are misusing the public money cr 
not. By the proposed change, and allowing the collector or receiver to be him- 
self the keeper, until the monev is wanted for use, you have no check whatever, 
and the whole money received by an officer may be squandered before it is want- 
ed for disbursement, without any means of detection. 

I, therefore, conclude the Sub-Treasury Bill ought not to be passed, if there were 
no other objections to it save that of the public money being less secure. But there 
are other weighty objections. 



The only plausible reason which can be assigned why we should discard Banks 
entirely and appoint Sub-Treasurers keepers ot" the public funds, must be, that 
the Banks are unworthy of confidence. 

If that be so, does it necessarily follow that you ouajht either not to receive any 
Bank notes in discharge of its due to the government, or if received, that you shouhl 
order the officer with whom they are deposited for safe-keeping, immediately to 
call upon the Banks for specie to their amount. It is absurd to say we will not 
deposit with the Bank, because we have no confidence in it, and at the same time 
to allow our officers to receive Bank notes and retain them in ihe hands of our offi- 
cer up to the time we wish to pay the money away. — There is less probability 
that the Banks would redeem their notes in specie when called on, than that they 
would deny the payment of specie for money received on deposit. 

The practice then of receiving nothing but specie from debtors, or of imme- 
diately converting the notes received into specie, and locUing that up until the 
time of disbursement arrives must be resorted to, in order to carry out your wishes. 

This I apprehend would be ruinous to f-ociety. A large portion of the spe- 
cie that might otherwise circulate would be withdrawn from the use of every 
person a considerable portion of each year. This v.ould eflect the prices of pro- 
perty, of labor, and of every thing else, and would render it next to impossible 
for even a prudent man, who happened to be in debt, ever to extricate himself. 

Beside this, the heavy draws for specie upon banks would compel them, 
in a short time, either to wind up or to do a very precarious business. A^ hen- 
ever a suspension of specie y)ayments would take place, we would have a depre- 
ciated paper currency, on which to do the business of the country, and specie 
would become an article of merchandise. — The man in office, or who had a job 
or contract with the government would receive his salary or his pay in specie, 
which he would immediately sell for bank paper, receiving a premium of some 
tenor fifteen per centum, and with that paper pay his debts or purchase such 
property as he might wish. This practice is at this momeut in operation. For 
every hundred dollars paid me as a member of Congress, I can receive one 
hundred and eight or nine dollars in bank notes, and with them pay the landlord 
who feeds or the tailor who clothes me. 

It has appeared to me, if we commence this entire operation which your Eeso- 
lution contemplates, and go into this thorough hard m.oney system, we shall 
presentl}', in Tennessee, especially, be in a deplorable condition. Look at its 
effects : all debts and taxes are to be paid to the federal government in hard 
money, or in bank notes, for which the specie will be immediately received, and 
the specie thus received is to be locked up securely, until it is paid out in dis- 
charge of some debt due by the government. Suppose our first years taxes 
paid, in all the States amounting to some twenty-five or thirty millions of dollars. 
That is only to be returned into circulation when the federal government pays 
the debts which it ov/es. What chance will Tennessee have to receive, by fede- 
ral disbursement, any portion of what she may have paid ? We have no forts, no 
foundries, no arsenals, no fortifications, no army, no navy, navy yards or dry 
docks. In short, we have next to no objects upon which the federal govern- 
ment expends monev, therefore none of it would be returned to us. We must 
pay up our full proportion of all indirect taxes in hard money, with a certainty that 
little or none of it would be returned to us by federal expenditures, and in the 
course of a very ^qw years we must be drained of every hard dollar we now have. 

There is another class of objections against this measure entitled, and I think, to 
still more grave considerations. 

The addition it will make to the powers of the federal executive. Every offi- 
cer with which the money is to be deposited, or left for safe-keeping, will be ap- 
poiiiled by the President and removable at his pleasure. We might as well give 
it to the President himself as entrust it to those whom he can and will control. 

This plan will multiply officers and increase considerably our expenses at its 



8 

co!nmencemcnt,and in the end no man can foresee the swarmsof dependents it may 
generate, and the additions it may occasion to our expenditbres of the public money. 

By the use of" the patronaiio ah-eady belonging to that officer, we all know and 
ieel that a larjie portion of the power vested in the legislative department exists 
only in name ; it is in substance vested in, and expressed by, the President as he 
wills ; shall we, then, give him a controlling |)0wer over all the pecuniary resources 
nf the federal government'? For one 1 cannot consent to it. 

Lastly, this Sub-treasury is nothing but a stepping stone to a bank created by 
the federal government, botton)ed on its own funds, attached to the Treasury De- 
partment, and all placed at the control of the President, or of those wlio will 
i\ever have any v, ill which does not correspond with his. 

It appears to me, no reasonable man can think if we commence this system 
we are to stop short of such a bank. 

Let one year only pass with all your revenue in specie, and that locked up, 
vour Slate Banks and paper currency deranged, and what then? Those who 
may wish to carry out this system will then recur to the sound doctrine advanced 
l»y the late President Jackson, "that the money of the country ought not to be 
ke[ft locked up by the government, any more than the arms belonging to the 
citizen:; — both will be sure to be misused." And it will be lirged that societ}'^ 
is suffering for a sound circulating medium: \ve must pass a law authorizing 
this money to be loaned, the interest will ease us of the payment of much taxes, 
and by circulating Treasury notes or drafts drawn by one of these Treasurers 
upon another, we will have a sound paper currency, good every where and 
bottomed on a metallic basis. This doctrine will become the democratic doc- 
trine, and every man who opposes it, will be denounced as a bank-bought fede- 
ralist, the law will [)ass and in due form we shall have the Treasunj Bunk ; and 
what then? 

Tkc purse and the sword, icill he united, and a power to increase Hie jrursc, as 
need may require, not by adding eagles and hard dollars to our funds, but by 
issues of paper, i:i such sums as may be deemed necessary and proper. This 
bank with its pecuniary means, and the credit and resources it will possess, can 
«;ither destroy or render subservient to the views of the Executive any State Banks 
which may be in existence. The whole moneyed power not only of the ledcral 
government, but of all State Banks being thus placed in the hands of the President, 
he will be able to control the destinies of the country. 

His loill becomes the law of the land. He will never again have to appeal to 
" the sober second thought's of the peopW to carry any favorite measure. His, first 
recommendation will always secure its speedy enactment into a law. 

In the views which 1 take of this subject, I may be in error ; but they are sin- 
cerely entertained. In the first instance, I placed my vote against it, under the 
belief that such were the sentiments of the people I represented. Afterwards, 
I WHS instructed by the Legislature to continue my (opposition. I did so, from a 
(-•onviction that I was right ; and nothing would give me more pleasure than to 
conform wvf vote to your wishes, if the measure were an ordinary one, or if I be- 
lieved the error of sanctioning it could be corrected ; but, believing, as I do, 
that the power once granted to the Executive can never be recalled, and tliat 
its exercise will take from tlie people that freedom of thought and of action Wjiich 
alone entitles our government to be considered Free, I most respectfully, but 
decidedly, state that I cannot and uill not oheij lh.c instruction contained in your se- 
cond resolution. 

Your third resolution unqualifiedly condemns the provisions of a bill of the last 
session, entitled, a bill to prevent the interference of certain federal officers in elec- 
tions, declares the same to be a violation of the Constitution of the United States, 
r.nq;ialifiedly condemns the vote given in favor «)f said bill by uiy colleague and 
luysulf, and instructs your Senators to vote against, and to use all fair and proper 
exertions to prevent, the passage of the same, or any similar bill. 



9 

When my colleague and myself gave our votes in favor of that bill, we acted 
imder the same solemn sanction of an oath to support the Constitution of the 
United States that the members of your honorable body did wlien they voted in 
tavor of tliis condemnatory resolution. We had the benefit of very able argu- 
njents both for and against the bill. We examined it with all the care we could, 
and came lo the conclusion that it was not unconstitutional, and believing that the 
prevailing practice of the President interfering in elections, both State and Fede- 
ral, through the instrumentality of officers, who hold their places during his pleasure 
called loudly for a remedy, we voted in favor of its passage. 

If your decision was final, I would not be so childish as to ask of you to re- 
consider the constitutional question. 

To men of ordinary capacity, or equivocal moral character, 1 might make such 
a request, from a belief that the decision was a hasty one, produced by some ex- 
traneous influence, and that a more deliberate investigation of the subject might 
lead to a different conclusion ; but, when I reflect that the leading members of 
that majority which passed the resolution are men as much distinguished by their 
moral character as by their intellectual attainments and deep research on objects 
connected with constitutional law, and see that my vote is not only " condcnnied," 
but " unqualifiedly condemned," I cannot hope that one of my humble preten- 
sions could urge any thing which would occasion even a doubt in your minds 
of the correctness of your decision. 

But there is a higher earthly tribunal than your honorable body, that will judge 
both your vote and jriine, and pass sentence dispassionately, without any predis- 
position to unqualifiedly condemn either of us, but in charity hoping that each be- 
lieved, when giving his vote, he was acting correctly. To that tribunal, then, o?/r 
common constituents, through you, their immediate representatives, I beg leave 
respectfully and briefly to assign some of the reasons which influenced the vote 
complained of. 

Every ofiicer named in that bill holds his office at the u-ill of the President, 
and is liable to be dismissed whenever it is the pleasure of the President to dis- 
miss him. Each and every one of the offices is created by act of Congress. — 
The qualification for the office, the tenure of it, and the duties to be performed by 
the officers are, and were, matters of legislative enactment. 

The President has no power to dismiss or control one of these oflicers, merely 
because he is President, but because Congress, hy law, gave him that power. The 
bill itself expressly provided that all these officers should be secure in the right 
to vote on all elections, according to their oion judgment, and only forbid their in- 
terference to control and influence the votes of others. 

I affirm that Congress had the power to create these offices, or not, at its 
pleasure. That, when they were created, Congress could prescribe the duties of 
the officers. That, if it had been deemed necessary, Congress could have enacted 
that the officers should hold the office during good behavior ; but that, if any one 
of the officers interfered to influence the votes of others, in any election, either 
State or Federal, it should be a misdemeanor in ofiice, for which he should be 
dismissed. 

When the bill complained of was under consideration. Congress had exactly the 
same power over the subject that it had when the offices were fi,rst creating. — 
They might have repealed the law entirely, and thus have turned out every one of 
these officers. 

Suppose, instead of the bill complained of, a bill had been introduced and pass- 
ed, stating that, whereas tliese officers were in the habit of interfering to influence 
the votes of the citizens in elections, therefore. Be it enacted, that the law creat- 
ing their oflices should be repealed, &c., would your honorable body venture the 
opinion that such law would have been unconstitutional, and that these officers 
would still have remained in office .'' I think not. 



10 

On the question of constitutional power, there can be no distinction between 
the case supposed ard the bill complained of. If the one would have been con- 
stitutional, so is the other. 

Prior to the year 1820, these officers held their office during pleasure. Congress 
then believed many of them h? d misdemeaned themselves, were defaulters, &c. ; 
and, with a view to provide a remedy, on the 15th of May, in that year, an act 
was passed changing their tenure, and limiting each of them to the term of four 
years-, and made ihem removable at pleasure within these four years. Has it ever 
been thought that act was unconstitutional ? Not at all. Yet such an objection 
might have been urged with much more force in that case than in this. 

The only reason assigned in your resolution why this bill was unconstitutional 
is, that it took from these officers the liberty of speech, and the Constitution 
provides that " Congress shall pass no law abridging the freedom of speech and 
of the press." 

This provision in the Constitution was intended for the safety and protection 
of the common citizen who holds no office. It was foreseen that those in o^ice 
mighi abuse their trust, and to protect themselves against exposure, might pass 
laws restraining the citizens from censuring them, either in speeches or through 
the press. Now, in your resolution, you exactly reverse the matter, and suppose 
it was intended to protect the instruments of the President, who hold office at 
his will, in their endeavors to influence and mislead the people in elections. — 
During the administration of the elder Mr. Adams, many complaints were made 
and charges urged, both in speeches and through the press, by the citizens, against 
him and those in office under hiin. With a view to silence the citizens, and to 
maintain and shield those in office, the sedition law was passed. The Republicans, 
one and all, condemned it as unconstitutional and unjust, and they were right in 
such condemnation. 

Your resolution maintains now, exactly the same doctrines then advanced by 
the Federalists. They wished to silence the people, that they might retain their 
places and power, and your resolution seeks to allow the officeholders to go forth 
with all their power and influence, to mislead and corrupt the people — obtain their 
TOtes in elections, and thus retain their offices with all their emoluments. 

Does your honorable body intend to affirm that Congress has no power to 
regulate the conduct of this class of officers? 

Are they to be allowed to go forth on days of election, and with a view to pro- 
cure votes for the President or his favorites, promise money or /'ffices, jobs or con- 
tracts, hy which much money may be made with but little labor? The office- 
holder, in making these promises to influence voters, would be using his powers 
of speech, which the resolution affirms Congress cannot abridge or lessen If 
the proposition can be maintained, then Congress had better go home and yield 
up every thing to the President and the corps who hold office at his pleasure. 

We will, after a little reflection, perceive that this resolution not only un- 
qualifiedly condemns your Senators for their vote, but necessarily the conduct 
and opinions of others whom the country has most delighted to honor. 

The only reason assigned in your resolution why this bill was unconstitutional 
is, that it abridged the freedom of speech. 

If you are correct, how dare Mr. Jefferson, " the Apostle of Liberty," in his 
letter to Governor McKean, use the language he did on this subject ? Still 
more, when he came into office as President, why did he dare to issue his cir- 
cular letter, prohibiting this class of officers, on pain of dismissal, from interfering 
in elections farther than to give their own votes ? 

He was sworn to support the Constitution, and if Congress abridges the free- 
dom of speech, secured by the Constitution, by the enactments proposed in this 
bill, it follows clearly that the President in his circular violated the same provi- 
sion, by pronouncing the like penalty for the like offence ? 



J 



11 

I defy any person to condemn the one without condemning the other ; unless, 
indeed, we suppose there is a class of politicians who believe the Constitution 
does not, and ought not to impose any restraint upon the President. 

I fear such a sect has lately sprung up, and is increasing. It cannot be too 
speedily suppressed. 

The late President, General Jackson, in his inaugural address, when " he 
was fresh from the people," inculcated the same doctrine with Mr. Jefferson. 
" To prevent the patronage of the Goverament irom being brought into con- 
tlict with the freedom of elections, was a duty inscribed in characters too legible 
to be misunderstof d," &c. was the strong language he then used. How was 
this duty to be discharged ? Did we not, one and all, believe he would discharge 
it as Mr. Jefferson had done ? If, then, these Presidents could, without violating 
the Constitution, prohibit these officers from interfering in elections, why could not 
Congress, by its enactments prohibit them likewise ? 

No satisfactoiy answer can be given to this question. 

The President already had the power vested in him to dismiss these officers 
at his pleasure ; and Congress unquestionably had the power to limit his discreHony 
by specifying the cases in which he should exercise it. If, then, my colleague 
and I erred on this question of power, with great deference I submit that, 
the company with which our opinions were associated ought, at least, to have 
softened the asperity of the language in which our condemnation was pronounced. 
If there was anyone subject above all others, upon which I believed my colleague 
and I could not mistake the sentiment of our constituents, it was that embraced 
in that bill. 

To prevent the President, through those officers, from interfering in elettions, 
was a theme upon which ihe friends of the late President (Jackson) had dwelt 
the most, both in and out of Congress. In 1826, a committee of the Senate, of 
which I was a very humble member, through their chairman had made a most 
able report, the principles of which were applauded by the whole party, and btf 
our State in particular. Upon them, mainly. General Jackson came into power; 
he gave them his solemn sanction in his inaugural address, in presence of thou- 
sands of witnesses. I had been twice elected after my opinions were well known 
upon this subject, and now, when I endeavor fahhfuUy to carry them out, to be 
unqualifiedly co7idemned for doing so, and that by those who then professed to think 
as I sincerely did, was what I did not anticipate. I am sure that, upon this sub- 
ject, my practice has corresponded with my professions. Siill, 1 should feel de- 
graded if I vvere to pronounce any old associate a traitor, or liken him to Ben- 
edict Arnold, because at this time he disagrees with me in opinion. 

Thev are greatly mistaken who suppose the object of this bill was to take 
from this class of officers any right whatever. Precisely the reverse was the 
intention. It was to emancipate them from the slavish bondage in which they 
were held. It was to enable every man of them to vote according to the dic- 
tates of his own judgment, and to absolve ihem from the painful alternative of be- 
ing compelled to, not only vote, but to electioneer for candidates not of their 
choice, but of the President, on pain of dismissal from office. 

The great object wai. to prevent the President from controlling the people in 
the choice of their officers. State and Federal. This class of officers, whoso 
daily bread for their families, depended on Executive favor, were constrained, 
as a part of their official duty, not otdy to vote as the President wished, but to en- 
deavor to i7)fluence others to do so likewise. If they did not perform this duly 
they were dismissed, and with their famiUes lei^t tj starve. An enlightened 
statesman once called them " the enlisted soldiers of the President." 

A politician, who knows as well as any other man the motives by v/hich men 
are influenced in relation to elections, says: — '^Whenever he sees an office-hol- 
der interfering in elections, he concludes he is thinking of his salary and his bread 



12 

and is a very unfit adviser of the people." V>y the passage of this bill it was 
hoped the instruments for misleading the people would be taken from the Presi- 
dent, that these "enlisted soldiers" would be discharged from electioneering duties 
and yet receive their pay ; and that if they performed the duties of their offices 
faithfully, the)'' might safely vote according to the dictates of their own judgment, 
and yet be secure in " their salaries and their daily bread.'' 

By your fourth resolution, as one of your Senators, I am instructed to "vote 
against the measure heretofore brought before Congress, which had for its ob- 
ject the distribution among the States of the proceeds of the sales of the Public 
Lands." 

In justice to myself, as well as to my constituents, I must be permitted to state 
the mariner in which my mind has operated on this subject at different times, and 
under different circumsta7ices. 

When a bill was first introduced, having such distribution as that spoken of 
for its object, I voted against its passage, and in favor of the veto of ihe Chief 
Magistrate, on the ground that no such distribution ought to be made until the 
public debt iras all paid. 

Upon looking into the deeds, by which those lands were ceded to the United 
States, by the respective States, I found that they were conveyed in trust, to 
pay out of the proceeds of their sales, our public debt then owing by the United 
Stales, and that the residue should be for the joint benefit of each of the several 
States including those making the cessions. 

At that time a portion of the Public debt was unpaid, and I deem it improper 
to distribute any part of this fund until the debt was fully discharged, that being 
the primary object of the donor. 

When a like bill was afterwards introduced, I not only voted for it, but gave it 
such support as my feeble abilities enabled me. 

By this time the public debt had been fully paid and \«e had a very large simi 
in the Treasury beyond the necessary wants of the Federal Government. 

I could not doubt the power of Congress to make the distribution, because there 
was an ex[)ress trust that this fund should be for the use of the respective States; 
we had a large sum on hand which I thought, in honestv, belonged to the States, 
and the proportion belonging to Tennessee, I believed, would be highly useful 
in enabling her to make internal improvements, and in providing a system for 
the education of those who might be unable to bear the expenses of educating 
themselves. In addition to these considerations, I perceived if this large sum was 
not distributed, it would encourage a system of extravagant expenditure incon- 
sistent with the welfare of the country 

I still believe these views were sound, and that if I committed any error, it was 
not giving my support to the first bill as well as the last. 1 believe it would be 
tmvvise, perhaps unconstitutional, for the Federal Government to impose taxes for 
the purposes of collecting more money than is necessary to carry out its atlairs, 
to the end that it might have a surplus to distribute among the Slates : but this 
fund stands (tn a different ground, it is a trust fund which belongs not to the F'ede- 
ral but to the State Governments. 

The ordinary duties necessary and proper for the regulation of our commerce 
with foreign nations, ought to be sufficient to bring into the Treasury as much 
money as would defray the economical expenses of the Federal Government, and 
each of the States ought to receive its fair proportion of the proceeds of the sales 
of the public lands. 

I consider Tennessee as honestly entitled to her proportion of this fund, as anv 
of your honorable body is to a tract of land devised to him by his father. 

It appears to me even at this time, our Slate very much needs her propor- 
tion of this fund, and that in a short time we shall be much more in want of it. 
lour honorable body may be satisfied that a majority of our citizens are wiiliag 



13 

to relinquish their interest in this fund, but I am not so satisfied, and as a Senator 
in Congress, I will not do any act by which such an idea is to be sanctioned. 

It may be in the course of a ver^- short time, that this fund will be indispensa- 
bly necessary to save our citizens from heavy taxation, and I should never forgive 
myself, if by yielding to your instructions, I did an act which produced a serious 
injury to the people, who have so long honored me with their confidence. 

By the last clauses in your fourth resolution, I am instructed to vote for gradu- 
ating the price of the public lands, and for granting pre-emption rights to occu- 
pants. 

These instructions correspond with the opinions" I have maintained and 
acted on, therefore, I should find no difficulty in conforming to your wishes in 
relation to them. 

In the fifth resolution, your instructions are " to vote for and use all fair and 
proper exertions to procure the passage of a law repealing the duties on imported 
salt." 

This subject has been before the Senate on several occasions since T have been 
a member, and my votes have ever been in favor of removing this duty, and I 
should still conform my conduct to my settled conviction, thai my past course on 
this subject has been correct. 

In your sixth resolution you state, that you " heartily approve the leading mea- 
sures and policy of the Administrations of Andrew Jackson and Martin Van 
Buren, and" instruct " your Senators to support in good faith, the leading 
measures and policy, as brought forward and advocated by the present President 
of the United States, and to use all fair and proper exertions to carry out, sustain 
and accomplish the same." 

The phraseolosy of this resolution is so general and indefinite, that I am not 
.sure I comprehend the meaning of your honorable bodv ; but believe you intend 
that I shall support all the leading measures of the Chief Maoistrate, as well 
those hereafter to be brought forward as those heretofore recommended. 

To instructions of this description, I could not with propriety, pay any atten- 
tion whatever. 

Our fathers and statesmen believed they had done much towards the security 
of civil liberty, when, by the Constitution, they divided the great powers conferred 
into three Departments, each, in its sphere, independent of the other two. These 
wei'e the Legislative, the Executive, and the Judicial. 

If the powers of any two of these Departments should be placed in the same 
hands, the whole machinery of the Government is destroyed, and the checks 
interposed are removed. 

You instruct your Senators to conform their votes on all the leading measures, 
to the will of the President, who is at the head of the Executive Department. — 
If you have a right to give such instructions, and your Senators are bound to 
obey, every oth^r Legislature in the Union has the same right, and their Senators 
would be equally bound to yield obedience. 

Why not let the President at once make the law and then execute it ? If we 
are bound to vote as he recommends, it is a solemn mockery to consult us at all. 
The law would not be the will of the Senate, but the will of the President. By 
this process the whole legislative power would be yielded up and surrendered to 
the Executive. 

I have been educated to believe, that continued watchfulness, and constant 
jealousy of those in power, are essential to the preservation of liberty. 

Your honorable body would now teach me a different lesson, and instead of 
being a sentinel on the watchtower, to guard the liberty ot my constituents, I am 
to betake myself to slumber, examine nothing, but vote on all leading measures 
as the President may recommend. 

If this be the kind of service to which your Senators are to be applied, I never 
can perform it, and feel myself unsuited to a station, which I have heretofore con- 
sidered most honorable as well as confidential. 



14 

After your Resolutions shall have performed their ivontcd office and my resigna- 
tion shall have been received, brfore electing my successor, I hope in your wisdom 
you will either rescind or expunge this sixth Jlesolution. Our common consti- 
tuents, the free and chivalrous citizens of Tennessee, I hope will ever be 
represented in the Senate by those whose principles and feelings are in accord- 
ance with their own ; and while this Resolution is suffered to remain, no man can 
accept that high station but one who is himself enslaved and lit only to represent 
those in the like condition xcilh himself. 

I have now troubled you with all the remarks I deem it necessary to makft 
upon your six Resolutions, taken separately, but do not feel that I will have dis- 
charged my whole duty until I have shown the deduction to be drawn from them 
when connectedly considered. 

They contain the political creed of the present Chief JMagistrafe of the United 
States, as expressed througii his friends in the Tennessee Legislature ; and w hat 
is it? 

By the 2d Resolution it is proved he wishes the whole moneyed power of the 
United States vested in him and subject to his control. 

By the 3d it is proved he will not agree that the patronage and power he now 
exercises shall be either lessened or regulated by law. 

By the 4th, it is proved thcit in order to have full coffers, he wishes the States 
to surrender their right to the moneys arising from the sales of the public lands, and 
By the 6lh, it is proved that he wishes Congress compelled to vote for every lead- 
ing measure he may recommend, and I am instructed in good faith to give my aid 
to maintain this creed. 

These instructions I cannot and will not obey. So far from it, my creed 
upon these points is : 

1st. "J'hat the power over the public purse ought to be constantly kept under 
the control of the legislature. 

2d. That the patronage as well as the expenditures of the Executive are 
already too large, and ought to be reduced. 

3d. That instead of surrendering the rights of the States to any portion of (he 
public moneys, they ought to adhere to those rights, and in due season provide 
foi a fair distributio.i of the land funds ; and 

Lastly, for no consideration ouglit we to agree that any other portion of the 
Legislative power shall be vested, either directly or indirectly, in the President, 
save that which is already vested in him by the Constitution of the United States. 
At last, no person can help seeing that the difference between your honorable 
body and myself is, that you wish to add to the power and patronage of the 
Executive, 1 wish to lessen his power and patronage. 

On the decision of this contest by tiie American people, in my opinion, the liberty 
of the country depends. Should your creed prevail, ere long the whole Legislative 
power, vested in (congress by the Constitution, will be transferred, substantially, to 
the President, and the only use of Congress will be to sland between the President 
and Public Odium, when laws are enacted which are disapproved by the people. 

In addition to this, the election of State officers, and State legislation, will be 
regulated according to the will of the Executive of the Union. Should mine 
prevail, the States will retain the powers they now possess — the powers of the 
Federal Government will remain divided into different departments in substance as 
well as form. 

Which of these creeds will best secure the liberty, the happiness and pros- 
perity of the people, I cheerl'ullv submit for decision to the Freemen of Tennessee. 
In England, this would be the common contest between the prerogative (f the 
crown and the privileges of the pfiople. Those maintaining j'our side would be 
called Tones, those maintaining mine would be called Whigs. 

Here it is a contest between the patronage of the President and the right of 
suffrage of the people. I will not at present give those who maintain your creed 
any name — you may give those who maintain mine any one you choose. 



15 

" Names are nothing with me." My motto is, " Principles in preference to 
men ;" while I sometimes think that of some of my opponents ought to be, " Men 
without principles;" though I would be sorry to intimate that such a molto would 
suit your honorable body. 

I shall trouble you wiih no further observations on these important topics. It 
has been mv aim to state my opinions with candor, and to maintain them with 
firmness ; but, at the same time, to treat your honorable body with the most 
perfect respect. 

I was called to the service of my State, fifteen years ago, without any solicita- 
tion on my part. With reluctance I accepted the high station [ now occupy. I 
have been continued in it, perhaps, too long for the interest of the country. I 
have been thrice elected, by the unanimous vote of your predecessors. My 
Services have been rendered in times of high party excitement — sometimes 
threatening to burst asunder the bonds of this Union — and your resolutions con- 
tain the liio-h compliment that bitter political opponents can find only a soiilary 
vote worthy, in their judgment, of " unqiialijied condemnation.'" 

I hope it will be in your power to select a successor who can bring into the 
service of the Slate more talents — I feci a proud consciousness, more purity of 
intention, or more unremitting industry, he never can. 

For the sake of place, I will never cnnge to power. You have instructed me to 
do those things which, entertaining the opinions I do, I fear I would not be 
foro-iven for, either in this world or in the next ; and practising upon the creed I 
"have long professed, I hereby tender to you my resignation of the trust confided 
to me, as one of the Senators from the State of Tennessee to the Congress of 
the United States. 

Allow me to add my sincere prayer that the Governor of the Universe may so 
over-rule our dissensions as to secure the liberty and promo'e the prosperittj of our 
common constituents. 

I have the honor to be, gentlemen. 

Your obedient servant, 

HU. L. WHITE. 
Senate Chamber, Jan. 11, 1839. 

After which he proceeded and said, 

Mr. President — I have now finished my task; henceforth, I ani to cease being a member 
of this bodv. I cannot share with former associutt's, the /lo/ior.s, the privileges, or the emul- 
uments ol a Senator in the Congress of the United States. At the same time, I will be re- 
lieved from ID}' portion ot the labors, and from sharing with you the high responsibilities u hich 
necessarilv pertain to the station. 

In taking my leave of you, in the utmost sincerity my prayers are, that collectively and 
individually you may be enabled to pursue a course, which will alTurd you the highe.M cooj- 
foris in this life; and that your labors may be so blessed as to S'iCureyou the grateful remem- 
brance of the present and all succeeding generatio.is. 



I 



LE D '10 



